We start with stability. We keep a coach more than two years, we keep our FO for extended years, etc. along with some of the players. This team has made bad hires starting with the Maloofs when they went broke. Then we were bought out by an owner who had crazy ideas and interfered in a negative way. It seems like Vivek has learned his lesson.
Now we have a coach who is competent. He is a player's coach. I suspect most players on the league would enjoy playing for him. Our GM is in his second year (gasp!) and I personally think he has brought in an upgrade in players and upgrade in coach. Let us remember homeboy Ryan Anderson didn't want to sign here. We don't get to pick and chose. We sign who we can. I think we have to hope like hell that Rudy doesn't eventually leave or we can trade him for a player of similar level of skill which measured in a simple minded fashion is a man with a PER of 20. I think a lot depends on the outcome of the Rudy situation. We have a new arena.
There is more I suppose or maybe less but stability is the key. Let us not have cries of "blow it up" after every loss. Let's let the hires definitively prove their skill or lack of skill before we decide what to do with them. Let us error in the direction of stability. Players have families and girl friends/boy friends and don't want to move every year or so unless, as is now, a few signed contracts with that risk. Nobody wants to come here knowing that by December 15 or whatever the date is, they may have to move again.
Let us at least give the outward appearance that we know what we are doing. Keeping the team in Sacramento was a big start.
Now we have a coach who is competent. He is a player's coach. I suspect most players on the league would enjoy playing for him. Our GM is in his second year (gasp!) and I personally think he has brought in an upgrade in players and upgrade in coach. Let us remember homeboy Ryan Anderson didn't want to sign here. We don't get to pick and chose. We sign who we can. I think we have to hope like hell that Rudy doesn't eventually leave or we can trade him for a player of similar level of skill which measured in a simple minded fashion is a man with a PER of 20. I think a lot depends on the outcome of the Rudy situation. We have a new arena.
There is more I suppose or maybe less but stability is the key. Let us not have cries of "blow it up" after every loss. Let's let the hires definitively prove their skill or lack of skill before we decide what to do with them. Let us error in the direction of stability. Players have families and girl friends/boy friends and don't want to move every year or so unless, as is now, a few signed contracts with that risk. Nobody wants to come here knowing that by December 15 or whatever the date is, they may have to move again.
Let us at least give the outward appearance that we know what we are doing. Keeping the team in Sacramento was a big start.
A lot of people underestimate how important it is to have the front office in sync with the head coach, and the head coach in sync with the star player. Everything else starts with that, with management being able to come out and say, "This is our coach, this is our star, this is our style." We can't establish that continuity when we're changing coaches every year.
And, FFS, when you have a mercurial, emotional star, and you finally find a coach that can get through to him, you don't ****ing fire him a third of the way into the season, because you don't think that the team is playing fast enough.
And, FFS, when you have a mercurial, emotional star, and you finally find a coach that can get through to him, you don't ****ing fire him a third of the way into the season, because you don't think that the team is playing fast enough.
You are going way too hard on him IMO.
FA does come when they see a future and a plan and I'm pretty sure that's what he means by that- when you don't have much going forward (outside Cousins of course) nailing your picks is importan to rebuild your image.
Minnesota just turned from the team that has Kevin Love and nothing else to one of the most talked about teams in the league by gathering intriguing young talent- and if you think the picks and young players Boston had wasn't a factor in getting Horford I beg the differ.
FA does come when they see a future and a plan and I'm pretty sure that's what he means by that- when you don't have much going forward (outside Cousins of course) nailing your picks is importan to rebuild your image.
Minnesota just turned from the team that has Kevin Love and nothing else to one of the most talked about teams in the league by gathering intriguing young talent- and if you think the picks and young players Boston had wasn't a factor in getting Horford I beg the differ.
For a market like Sacramento I think it means you really have to capitalise on every opportunity you have.
You need to at the very least be "up and coming" if you're not a winning team already. Nobody thinks the Kings are up and coming. Nobody looks at the Kings and thinks they've got a good core to build around for the next 5-8 years. The Cousins trade rumors still swirl because we aren't winning. Now I don't know enough about this year's draft to say whether we blew it or not, and I don't know how papa will turn out though I have my doubts. But fact is we've drafted rather poorly year after year and while one draft isn't going to sway FAs, multiple drafts resulting in you being both a losing team and one that has no young talent is going to turn them away.
It's great that many fans are optimistic, but I personally don't think we're making the playoffs this year, and I think that's going to have quite an impact on our roster next year.
I like Joerger (all my seemingly anti-Joerger posts are more intended to show how basketball wise Karl was not that bad. Look how many 3s Cousins is shooting this year for example, yet nobody is up in arms about it). I think having Joerger is a good step in the right direction. But we need to become a winning team quickly or rebuild with a future. Many fans here don't want to trade Cousins unless he wants out. History and whatnot. From my perspective we're only looking to trade him if we don't start winning, and that gives me a 7-8 year history of not winning with him, whoever's fault it is.
Ultimately all I can judge is the actual results. A 10 win team that loses all its games by 2 points is still a 10 win team. It is not up and coming. We have to become a winning team, but how to do that is something that has escaped the Kings for the past decade. All I know is that doing a better job of drafting guys, having a long term plan in place and having coaching stability is more likely to help than hurt
let's set an identity of how we want to play and build around that.
You need to at the very least be "up and coming" if you're not a winning team already. Nobody thinks the Kings are up and coming. Nobody looks at the Kings and thinks they've got a good core to build around for the next 5-8 years. The Cousins trade rumors still swirl because we aren't winning. Now I don't know enough about this year's draft to say whether we blew it or not, and I don't know how papa will turn out though I have my doubts. But fact is we've drafted rather poorly year after year and while one draft isn't going to sway FAs, multiple drafts resulting in you being both a losing team and one that has no young talent is going to turn them away.
It's great that many fans are optimistic, but I personally don't think we're making the playoffs this year, and I think that's going to have quite an impact on our roster next year.
I like Joerger (all my seemingly anti-Joerger posts are more intended to show how basketball wise Karl was not that bad. Look how many 3s Cousins is shooting this year for example, yet nobody is up in arms about it). I think having Joerger is a good step in the right direction. But we need to become a winning team quickly or rebuild with a future. Many fans here don't want to trade Cousins unless he wants out. History and whatnot. From my perspective we're only looking to trade him if we don't start winning, and that gives me a 7-8 year history of not winning with him, whoever's fault it is.
Ultimately all I can judge is the actual results. A 10 win team that loses all its games by 2 points is still a 10 win team. It is not up and coming. We have to become a winning team, but how to do that is something that has escaped the Kings for the past decade. All I know is that doing a better job of drafting guys, having a long term plan in place and having coaching stability is more likely to help than hurt
let's set an identity of how we want to play and build around that.
Here's a list of the free agents that signed with Orlando the year that Shaquille O'Neal was drafted:
Howard Wright
Ron Grandison
Tom Tolbert*
Lorenzo Williams*
*denotes a player who was signed after the start of the regular season.
Here's a list of the free agents that signed with San Antonio the year that Tim Duncan was drafted:
Reggie Geary
Jaren Jackson
Malik Rose
Not particularly noteworthy on the "swayed by a draft pick" front. It's possible that you didn't understand @Dime Dropper's post.
Howard Wright
Ron Grandison
Tom Tolbert*
Lorenzo Williams*
*denotes a player who was signed after the start of the regular season.
Here's a list of the free agents that signed with San Antonio the year that Tim Duncan was drafted:
Reggie Geary
Jaren Jackson
Malik Rose
Not particularly noteworthy on the "swayed by a draft pick" front. It's possible that you didn't understand @Dime Dropper's post.
F
-
Mr. S£im CitrusThat's right, I said it!Staff Member Contributor
↑
We start with stability. We keep a coach more than two years, we keep our FO for extended years, etc. along with some of the players.
A lot of people underestimate how important it is to have the front office in sync with the head coach, and the head coach in sync with the star player. Everything else starts with that, with management being able to come out and say, "This is our coach, this is our star, this is our style." We can't establish that continuity when we're changing coaches every year.
And, FFS, when you have a mercurial, emotional star, and you finally find a coach that can get through to him, you don't ****ing fire him a third of the way into the season, because you don't think that the team is playing fast enough.
Today at 1:20 PMReport
LikeReply
dude12, Glenn, kingsfan1984 and 4 others like this.
-
Mr. S£im CitrusThat's right, I said it!Staff Member Contributor
↑
We start with stability. We keep a coach more than two years, we keep our FO for extended years, etc. along with some of the players.
A lot of people underestimate how important it is to have the front office in sync with the head coach, and the head coach in sync with the star player. Everything else starts with that, with management being able to come out and say, "This is our coach, this is our star, this is our style." We can't establish that continuity when we're changing coaches every year.
And, FFS, when you have a mercurial, emotional star, and you finally find a coach that can get through to him, you don't ****ing fire him a third of the way into the season, because you don't think that the team is playing fast enough.
Today at 1:20 PMReport
LikeReply
dude12, Glenn, kingsfan1984 and 4 others like this.
Second of all, protip: when you are trying to refer someone to a post with a particular timestamp, it is helpful to not assume that that person is in the same time zone that you are in. I did not make that post at 1:20pm my time.
